Engaged communities, critical citizens: A pedagogy for collaboratively developing knowledge and solutions to public issues Cynthia Gordon, Harvard University [cjg996@mail.harvard.edu]
Keywords: Grounded theory, critical community engaged scholarship, higher education, classroom pedagogy, public good
Conference track: Contexts and methods: Theoretical and conceptual frameworks, research designs, and methodological issues
Format: Research/Scholarly paper
Summary Community-engaged scholarship is recommended as a practice for achieving civic engagement outcomes. Yet community-engaged scholarship has multiple meanings, which results in confusion about which practices should be integrated into higher education pedagogy. I propose an integrated definition and six crucial components of community-engaged scholarship and a new direction—critical community-engaged scholarship. In this paper, I connect knowledge from multiple sources to construct one definition for community-engaged scholarship based on what these terms have in common.
I utilized MaxQDA—a qualitative data analysis software—and grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). I systematically coded the data, sorted it into axial codes, and synthesized the axial codes into one integrated theory—my working definition for community-engaged scholarship. Six components that can be applied to classroom pedagogy emerged repeatedly in the literature. Ideally, community-engaged scholarship includes: 1) scholarly investigation of real-life social problems or public issues; 2) real-life social problems and research to address these problems that are defined with or by the community; 3) knowledge to solve or improve public issues that is collaboratively developed by universities and communities; 4) the utilization of institutional resources and knowledge to solve these real-life social problems; 5) community-university partnerships that are collaborative and reciprocal and have shared authority in defining success; and 6) community-engaged research or projects that are related to faculty members’ research and teaching.
The six components define community-engaged scholarship; in the context of our unequal and diverse nation, it is now more crucial than ever for US higher education institutions to graduate students who are committed to participate for justice in our democracy. It is time to connect knowledge from multiple sources to provide clarity and direction for higher education professionals interested in shaping civic-engagement for the public good.
American Association of State Colleges and Universities. (2002). Stepping forward as stewards of place: A guide for leading public engagement at state colleges and universities. Washington, DC: Author and Kellogg Foundation.
Avila-Linn, C., Rice, K., & Akin, S. (2012). Designing community-based courses: A guide for instructors to develop community partnerships and create engaged public scholarship courses. Berkeley, CA: Cal Corps Public Service Center at University of California, Berkeley.
Benson, L., Harkavy, I., & Puckett, J. (2008). Universities, schools, communities, and democracy. Good Society Journal, 17(2), 86–94.
Boyer, E. L. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1(1), 11–21.
Calleson, D., Kauper-Brown, J., & Seifer, S. D. (2005). Community-engaged scholarship toolkit. Seattle, WA: Community-Campus Partnerships for Health.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative ananlysis. Thousand Oakes, CA: SAGE.
CIC Committee on Engagement. (2005). Engaged scholarship: A resource guide. Champaign, IL: Author.
Colbeck, C. L., & Wharton M. P. (2006). The public scholarship: Reintegrating Boyer's four domains. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2006(129), 7-19. Community Campus Partnerships for Health (n.d.). Community-engaged scholarship. Retrieved from http://www.ccph.info/
Couto, R. A. (2001). The promise of a scholarship of engagement. New England Resource Center for Higher Education, 12(2), 4–7.
Furco, A. (2010). The engaged campus: Toward a comprehensive approach to public engagement. British Journal of Educational Studies, 58(4), 375–390.
Furco, A. & Goss, M. (2001). An analysis of civic intentions in higher education mission statements. (Unpublished manuscript). University of California, Berkeley.
Giles, D. E., Jr. (2008). Understanding an emerging field of scholarship: Toward a research agenda for engaged, public scholarship. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(2), 97–106.
Howard, J. P. (2011, November). Engaging our terminological messiness: Conceptualizations, distinctions, assessments thereof, and implications. Paper presented at the International Association for Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement, Chicago, IL.
Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. P., & Becker, A. B. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review Public Health, 19, 173–202.
Moore, T. L., & Ward, K. (2010). Institutionalizing faculty engagement through research, teaching, and service at research universities. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 17(1), 44–58.
Saltmarsh, J., Giles, D. E., Jr., Ward, E., & Buglione, S. M. (2009). Rewarding community-engaged scholarship. New Directions for Higher Education, 2009(147), 25–35.
Sandmann, L. R. (2008). Conceptualization of the scholarship of engagement in higher education: A strategic review, 1996-2006. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(1), 91-104.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
The Kellogg Commission. (1999). Returning to our roots: The engaged institution. Washington DC: Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities. Retrieved from http://www.aplu.org/NetCommunity/Document.Doc?id=183
Clearinghouse & National Review Board for The Scholarship of Engagement. (2002). Evaluation criteria for the scholarship of engagement. The scholarship of engagement online. Retrieved from http://www.scholarshipofengagement.org/index.html
Weerts, D. J., & Sandmann, L. R. (2010). Community engagement and boundary-spanning roles at research universities. Journal of Higher Education, 81, 632-657.
To access materials from this session please click on the file link(s) below:
Engaged communities, critical citizens: A pedagogy for collaboratively developing knowledge and solutions to public issues
Cynthia Gordon, Harvard University [cjg996@mail.harvard.edu]
Keywords: Grounded theory, critical community engaged scholarship, higher education, classroom pedagogy, public good
Conference track: Contexts and methods: Theoretical and conceptual frameworks, research designs, and methodological issues
Format: Research/Scholarly paper
Summary
Community-engaged scholarship is recommended as a practice for achieving civic engagement outcomes. Yet community-engaged scholarship has multiple meanings, which results in confusion about which practices should be integrated into higher education pedagogy. I propose an integrated definition and six crucial components of community-engaged scholarship and a new direction—critical community-engaged scholarship. In this paper, I connect knowledge from multiple sources to construct one definition for community-engaged scholarship based on what these terms have in common.
I utilized MaxQDA—a qualitative data analysis software—and grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). I systematically coded the data, sorted it into axial codes, and synthesized the axial codes into one integrated theory—my working definition for community-engaged scholarship.
Six components that can be applied to classroom pedagogy emerged repeatedly in the literature. Ideally, community-engaged scholarship includes: 1) scholarly investigation of real-life social problems or public issues; 2) real-life social problems and research to address these problems that are defined with or by the community; 3) knowledge to solve or improve public issues that is collaboratively developed by universities and communities; 4) the utilization of institutional resources and knowledge to solve these real-life social problems; 5) community-university partnerships that are collaborative and reciprocal and have shared authority in defining success; and 6) community-engaged research or projects that are related to faculty members’ research and teaching.
The six components define community-engaged scholarship; in the context of our unequal and diverse nation, it is now more crucial than ever for US higher education institutions to graduate students who are committed to participate for justice in our democracy. It is time to connect knowledge from multiple sources to provide clarity and direction for higher education professionals interested in shaping civic-engagement for the public good.
References
American Association of Colleges and Universities. (2008). Diversity Web. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/american_commitments/index.cfm
American Association of State Colleges and Universities. (2002). Stepping forward as stewards of place: A guide for leading public engagement at state colleges and universities. Washington, DC: Author and Kellogg Foundation.
Avila-Linn, C., Rice, K., & Akin, S. (2012). Designing community-based courses: A guide for instructors to develop community partnerships and create engaged public scholarship courses. Berkeley, CA: Cal Corps Public Service Center at University of California, Berkeley.
Benson, L., Harkavy, I., & Puckett, J. (2008). Universities, schools, communities, and democracy. Good Society Journal, 17(2), 86–94.
Boyer, E. L. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1(1), 11–21.
Calleson, D., Kauper-Brown, J., & Seifer, S. D. (2005). Community-engaged scholarship toolkit. Seattle, WA: Community-Campus Partnerships for Health.
Campus Compact. (2011). Presidents' statement of principles. Retrieved from http://www.compact.org/about/presidents-statement-of-principles/
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (2010). Classification description: Community engagement elective classification. Retrieved from http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/descriptions/community_engagement.php?key=1213
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative ananlysis. Thousand Oakes, CA: SAGE.
CIC Committee on Engagement. (2005). Engaged scholarship: A resource guide. Champaign, IL: Author.
Colbeck, C. L., & Wharton M. P. (2006). The public scholarship: Reintegrating Boyer's four domains. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2006(129), 7-19.
Community Campus Partnerships for Health (n.d.). Community-engaged scholarship. Retrieved from http://www.ccph.info/
Couto, R. A. (2001). The promise of a scholarship of engagement. New England Resource Center for Higher Education, 12(2), 4–7.
Furco, A. (2010). The engaged campus: Toward a comprehensive approach to public engagement. British Journal of Educational Studies, 58(4), 375–390.
Furco, A. & Goss, M. (2001). An analysis of civic intentions in higher education mission statements. (Unpublished manuscript). University of California, Berkeley.
Gibson, C. (2006). New times demand new scholarship: Research universities and civic engagement. A leadership agenda. Medford, MA: Campus Compact and Tufts University. Retrieved from http://www.compact.org/wp-content/uploads/initiatives/research_universities/conference_report.pdf
Giles, D. E., Jr. (2008). Understanding an emerging field of scholarship: Toward a research agenda for engaged, public scholarship. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(2), 97–106.
Howard, J. P. (2011, November). Engaging our terminological messiness: Conceptualizations, distinctions, assessments thereof, and implications. Paper presented at the International Association for Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement, Chicago, IL.
Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. P., & Becker, A. B. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review Public Health, 19, 173–202.
Moore, T. L., & Ward, K. (2010). Institutionalizing faculty engagement through research, teaching, and service at research universities. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 17(1), 44–58.
Musil, C. M. (2011). Reconfiguring civic engagement on campus: What are the levers for change? Diversity and Democracy, 14(3), 5-7. Retrieved from http://www.diversityweb.org/DiversityDemocracy/vol14no3/vol14no3.pdf
Phelps, L. W. (2007). Learning about scholarship in action in concept and practice. White Paper from the Academic Affairs Committee of the University Senate. Syracuse University. Retrieved from http://universitysenate.syr.edu/academic/pdf/white-paper-nov-12-2007.pdf
Saltmarsh, J., Giles, D. E., Jr., Ward, E., & Buglione, S. M. (2009). Rewarding community-engaged scholarship. New Directions for Higher Education, 2009(147), 25–35.
Sandmann, L. R. (2008). Conceptualization of the scholarship of engagement in higher education: A strategic review, 1996-2006. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(1), 91-104.
Silka, L., & Saltmarsh, J. (2011). Definition of engaged scholarship. Retrieved from http://www.nerche.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=265:definition-of-engaged-scholarship&catid=28:general
Stanton, T. K., & Howard, J. P. (2011). Research university engaged scholarship toolkit. Retrieved from http://www.compact.org/initiatives/civic-engagement-at-research-universities/trucen-overview/
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
The Kellogg Commission. (1999). Returning to our roots: The engaged institution. Washington DC: Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities. Retrieved from http://www.aplu.org/NetCommunity/Document.Doc?id=183
Clearinghouse & National Review Board for The Scholarship of Engagement. (2002). Evaluation criteria for the scholarship of engagement. The scholarship of engagement online. Retrieved from http://www.scholarshipofengagement.org/index.html
Weerts, D. J., & Sandmann, L. R. (2010). Community engagement and boundary-spanning roles at research universities. Journal of Higher Education, 81, 632-657.
To access materials from this session please click on the file link(s) below: